Cited by 36Meta-analysis and systematic reviewsHealth Policy Implementation ScienceStatistical Methods in Clinical Trials

Risk of bias in randomised controlled trials of health behaviour change interventions: Evidence, practices and challenges

Open access
de Bruin, Marijn·2015·Psychology & Health

Abstract

The major strength of a randomised controlled trial (RCT) is the degree to which it can establish a causal relationship between an experimental treatment and the outcome (i.e. internal validity), a...

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/08870446.2014.960653

Cites

22 of 22 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
de Bruin, M.
Venue
Psychology & Health
Published
2014-12-09
Volume
30
Issue
1
Pages
1-7
ISSN
  • 0887-0446 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-8321
OpenAlex
W2080626225
Cited by
36
References
22
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 2 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 1
FWCI
4.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Psychology and Health (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Aberdeen University Research Archive (Aberdeen University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
Keywords
risk of bias, randomized controlled trials, health behavior change interventions, internal validity, causal inference, clinical trial design
MeSH terms
Health Promotion, Humans, Research Design, Risk, Health Behavior, Bias, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Evidence-Based Practice

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review